Cyhalofop-butyl; Pesticide Tolerances, 82152-82157 [2011-33480]

Download as PDF 82152 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerances in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this action alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition, this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES VII. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:50 Dec 29, 2011 Jkt 226001 Dated: December 14, 2011. Lois Rossi, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows: PART 180—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 2. Amend § 180.573 as follows: a. Revise the introductory text in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (c); ■ b. Remove the commodities ‘‘Lentil, seed’’ and ‘‘Pea, dry, seed’’ from the table in paragraph (a)(1); ■ c. Add alphabetically the commodities ‘‘Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C’’ and ‘‘Sunflower subgroup 20B’’ and add footnote 1 to the table in paragraph (a)(1). The revised and added text read as follows: ■ ■ § 180.573 Tepraloxydim; tolerances for residues. (a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of tepraloxydim, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only the combined residues of tepraloxydim, (2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and OH–GP (3-hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as tepraloxydim, in or on the commodities. Parts per million Commodity specified below is to be determined by measuring only the combined residues of tepraloxydim (2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), OH–GP (3hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), and GL (3-(2oxotetrahydropyran-4-yl)-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as tepraloxydim, in or on the commodities. * * * * * (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. A tolerance with regional registration, as defined in § 180.1(l), is established for residues of tepraloxydim, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only the combined residues of tepraloxydim (2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and OH–GP (3-hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as tepraloxydim, in or on the commodities. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2011–33477 Filed 12–29–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0283; FRL–9330–1] Cyhalofop-butyl; Pesticide Tolerances Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: This regulation amends tolerances for residues of cyhalofopbutyl in or on rice, grain and rice, wild, Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C 1 .... 0.10 grain. Dow AgroSciences, LLC requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). * * * * DATES: This regulation is effective Sunflower subgroup 20B 1 ............ 0.20 December 30, 2011. Objections and requests for hearings must be received * * * * on or before February 28, 2012, and must be filed in accordance with the 1 There are no U.S. registrations for cominstructions provided in 40 CFR part modities in this subgroup. 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). (2) Tolerances are established for residues of tepraloxydim, including its ADDRESSES: EPA has established a metabolites and degradates, in or on the docket for this action under docket commodities in the table below. identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– Compliance with the tolerance levels OPP–2011–0283. All documents in the * PO 00000 * Frm 00078 Fmt 4700 * Sfmt 4700 * SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM 30DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations docket are listed in the docket index available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305– 5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn V. Montague, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (703) 305–1243; email address: montague.kathryn@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES A. Does this action apply to me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those engaged in the following activities: • Crop production (NAICS code 111). • Animal production (NAICS code 112). • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311). • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532). This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:50 Dec 29, 2011 Jkt 226001 B. How can I get electronic access to other related information? You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA’s tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR site at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/ text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/ Title40/40tab_02.tpl. C. How Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request? Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– OPP–2011–0283 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before February 28, 2012. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b). In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit a copy of your non-CBI objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0283, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. • Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket Facility’s normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305–5805. PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 82153 II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance In the Federal Register of April 20, 2011 (76 FR 22067) (FRL–8869–7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 1F7836) by Dow AgroSciences, LLC, 9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.576 be amended by reestablishing and making permanent tolerances for residues of the herbicide, cyhalofopbutyl, R-(+)-n-butyl-2-(4(4-cyano-2fluorophenoxy)-phenoxy)propionate, plus cyhalofop acid, R-(+)-2-(4(4-cyano2-fluorophenoxy)-phenoxy)propionic acid) and the di-acid metabolite, (2R)-4[4-(1-carboxyethoxy)phenoxy]-3fluorobenzoic acid, in or on rice, grain and rice, wild, grain at 0.35 parts per million (ppm), respectively. That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC, the registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing. These amended tolerances are required due to recent side-by-side field trial data submitted to support a new formulation of cyhalofop-butyl, which resulted in higher than anticipated residues associated with the currently registered formulation with this active ingredient. Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has increased the proposed tolerances from 0.35 ppm to 0.40 ppm and has revised the tolerance expression. The reasons for these changes are explained in Unit IV.D. III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’ Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.’’ This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM 30DER1 82154 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. * * *’’ Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure for cyhalofop-butyl including exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks associated with cyhalofop-butyl follows. A. Toxicological Profile EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children. Cyhalofop-butyl has low or minimal acute toxicity via the oral, dermal and inhalation routes of exposure. It is minimally irritating to the eye, nonirritating to the skin and is not a dermal sensitizer. Kidney effects were observed after subchronic and chronic dosing of the rat and mouse as well as in the rabbit developmental and rat reproduction studies. In the 90-day rat study, lipofuscin pigment deposition in proximal tubule kidney cells was noted in both sexes in addition to hepatocyte eosinophilic granules (males only); and in the 90-day mouse study (females only), there was an increase in absolute and relative kidney weights as well as swelling of the proximal tubule cells. In the rabbit developmental study, 1/18 dams in the mid-dose group and 9/18 dams in the high-dose group died or were sacrificed in extremis after exhibiting hematuria (gross pathological examinations revealed cloudy or dark colored kidneys). Slight kidney tubular cell swelling was observed only in adult males in the rat reproductive toxicity study. In the 18-month mouse carcinogenicity study, kidney findings included tubular dilatation, chronic glomurulonephritis and hyaline casts in females (not males). In both sexes in the chronic/carcinogenicity rat study increased deposition of kidney changes (early and increased deposition of the pigments lipofuscin and hemosiderin in VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:50 Dec 29, 2011 Jkt 226001 the renal proximal tubular cells) was observed. In addition, in females only, renal mineralization was observed. Non-kidney effects observed following subchronic or chronic exposure to cyhalofop-butyl included hyperplasia of the stomach mucosal epithelium (male mice only) in the 18month mouse carcinogenicity study and brown and/or atrophied thymuses and decreased thymus weight in the 90-day dog study. The thymus effects, which could be an indication of potential immunotoxicity, were not observed in the 1-year dog study or in other species (rats, mice or rabbits) and were not seen in any tested species following chronic exposure to cyhalofop-butyl. There was no evidence of developmental, reproductive or endocrine toxicity in the toxicology studies for cyhalofop-butyl. In the rat developmental toxicity study, there were no maternal or fetal effects observed up to the limit dose. In the rabbit developmental toxicity study, no fetal effects were observed up to the limit dose; whereas kidney effects (deaths related to hematuria and the occurrence of cloudy or dark colored kidneys on gross pathological examination) were seen in maternal animals. Slight kidney tubular cell swelling was observed in adult males in the rat reproductive toxicity study with no evidence of treatment-related effects observed in females or offspring. There were no systemic or neurotoxic effects noted at the limit dose in the gavage acute neurotoxicity study or in the 90day feeding neurotoxicity study. In a previous 2002 risk assessment for cyhalofop-butyl, it was not possible to assess the carcinogenic potential of cyhalofop-butyl due to insufficient dosing in the rat and mouse carcinogenicity studies. In the absence of acceptable data, EPA assumed that cyhalofop-butyl had the same carcinogenic potential as the structural analog, diclofop-methyl, and conducted an exposure assessment to evaluate cancer risk using quantitative linear low-dose extrapolation and the Q1* for diclofop-methyl of 2.3 × 10¥1 (mg/kg/ day)¥1. Subsequently, two specific mechanistic studies (Peroxisome Proliferator Receptor-Alpha Reporter Assays) in the mouse were submitted to EPA. Review of the mechanistic data indicated that cyhalofop-butyl is not a liver toxicant/carcinogen for humans, since the rodent liver mode of action is not likely to occur in humans; and that the doses in the original long-term PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 studies were approaching a maximum tolerated dose. In addition, there were no positive effects in the battery of mutagenic studies. Based on these findings, EPA has classified cyhalofopbutyl as ‘‘Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.’’ Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by cyhalofop-butyl as well as the no-observed-adverse-effectlevel (NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http:// www.regulations.gov in document ‘‘Cyhalofop-butyl. Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Amended Tolerances on Rice and Wild Rice,’’ p. 8 in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– 2011–0283 and are also discussed in the final rule published in the Federal Register of April 8, 2009 (74 FR 15876) (FRL–8406–8). B. Toxicological Points of Departure/ Levels of Concern Once a pesticide’s toxicological profile is determined, EPA identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/ safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to calculate a safe exposure level—generally referred to as a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa. gov/pesticides/factsheets/ riskassess.htm. A summary of the toxicological endpoints for cyhalofopbutyl used for human risk assessment is shown in the Table of this unit. E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM 30DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 82155 TABLE—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR CYHALOFOP-BUTYL FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT Exposure/scenario Acute Dietary (All Populations). Chronic dietary (All populations). Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation). Point of departure and uncertainty/safety factors RfD, PAD, LOC for risk assessment Study and toxicological effects No appropriate endpoint attributable to a single dose was available in the current database. Therefore, an acute RfD was not established for the general U.S. population or any population subgroup. NOAEL= 1.0 mg/kg/day UFA = 10x. UFH = 10x FQPA SF = 1x Chronic RfD = 0.010 mg/ kg/day. cPAD = 0.010 mg/kg/day Carcinogenicity study in mice. LOAEL = 10.06/10.28 mg/kg/day, M/F, based on kidney effects in females including tubular dilatation, chronic glomerulonephritis, and hyaline casts. Classified as ‘‘not likely to be carcinogenic to humans’’ in accordance with the EPA Final Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (March 29, 2005). tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern. C. Exposure Assessment 1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to cyhalofop-butyl, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing cyhalofop-butyl tolerances in 40 CFR 180.576. EPA assessed dietary exposures from cyhalofop-butyl in food as follows: i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for cyhalofop-butyl; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary. ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998 Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed that all rice and wild rice commodities would be treated with cyhalofop-butyl and contain tolerance-level residues. iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that cyhalofop-butyl does not pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary. 2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for cyhalofop-butyl in drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of cyhalofop-butyl. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:50 Dec 29, 2011 Jkt 226001 used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ oppefed1/models/water/index.htm. Based on the Tier 1 Rice Model and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–GROW) model, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of cyhalofop-butyl for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments (the only dietary exposure scenario for which a toxicological endpoint of concern was identified) are estimated to be 21 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.152 ppb for ground water. Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of 21 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water. 3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Cyhalofop-butyl is not registered for any specific use patterns that would result in residential exposure. 4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider ‘‘available information’’ concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.’’ EPA has not found cyhalofop-butyl to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and cyhalofop-butyl does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that cyhalofop-butyl does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA’s efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ cumulative. D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children 1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different factor. 2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal toxicology data base for cyhalofop-butyl includes rat and rabbit developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity study in rats. There were no treatment-related effects observed in fetuses or offspring in any of these studies. 3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following findings: E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM 30DER1 82156 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES i. The toxicity database for cyhalofopbutyl is complete except for immunotoxicity data. EPA has evaluated the available cyhalofop-butyl toxicity data to determine whether an additional database uncertainty factor is needed to account for potential immunotoxicity. Brown and/or atrophied thymuses and decreased thymus weight were observed in the 90day dog study. However, these effects, which could be an indication of potential immunotoxicity, were not observed in the 1-year dog study or in other species (rats, mice or rabbits) and were not seen in any tested species following chronic exposure to cyhalofop-butyl. Based on these considerations, EPA has concluded that the doses and endpoints selected for risk assessment (along with traditional uncertainty factors) are protective of potential immunotoxicity and an additional uncertainty factor is not needed. The required immunotoxicity study has been received by EPA and is currently being reviewed. A screeninglevel review of this study indicates that there are no immunotoxic effects associated with cyhalofop-butyl. ii. There is no indication that cyhalofop-butyl is a neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity. iii. There is no evidence that cyhalofop-butyl results in increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction study. iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based on 100 percent crop treated and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to cyhalofop-butyl in drinking water. Residential exposure of infants and children is not expected. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by cyhalofop-butyl. E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:50 Dec 29, 2011 Jkt 226001 estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE exists. 1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, cyhalofop-butyl is not expected to pose an acute risk. 2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to cyhalofopbutyl from food and water will utilize 18% of the cPAD for All Infants (< 1 year old), the population group receiving the greatest exposure. There are no residential uses for cyhalofopbutyl. 3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Cyhalofop-butyl is not registered for any use patterns that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, the short-term aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from exposure to cyhalofop-butyl through food and water and will not be greater than the chronic aggregate risk. 4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Cyhalofop-butyl is not registered for any use patterns that would result in intermediate-term residential exposure. Therefore, the intermediate-term aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from exposure to cyhalofop-butyl through food and water, which has already been addressed, and will not be greater than the chronic aggregate risk. 5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the evidence summarized in Unit III.A., cyhalofopbutyl is classified as ‘‘not likely to be carcinogenic to humans’’ and is, therefore, not expected to pose a cancer risk. 6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate exposure to cyhalofopbutyl residues. PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology Adequate enforcement methodology (Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) Method GRM 99.06) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350; telephone number: (410) 305–2905; email address: residuemethods@epa.gov. B. International Residue Limits In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization/ World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level. The Codex has not established a MRL for cyhalofop-butyl. C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances EPA has revised the proposed tolerances levels. The petitioner requested tolerances of 0.35 ppm based on the use of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) tolerance calculation procedures. Based on the submitted rice data using the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) tolerance calculation procedures that were implemented in April 2011, EPA calculated that the rice, grain and wild rice, grain tolerances should be 0.40 ppm. Also, EPA is revising the tolerance expression in order to make clear that the tolerances cover residues of the herbicide cyhalofop-butyl, including its metabolites and degradates. Compliance with the tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring cyhalofop butyl, cyhalofop acid, and the di-acid metabolite. E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM 30DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations V. Conclusion Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of cyhalofop-butyl, including its metabolites and degradates, as set forth in the regulatory text. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this action alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:50 Dec 29, 2011 Jkt 226001 82157 entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition, this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). phenoxy)propionate], cyhalofop acid [R(+)-2-(4(4-cyano-2-fluorophenoxy)phenoxy)propionic acid], and the diacid metabolite [(2R)-4-(4-(1carboxyethoxy)phenoxy)-3fluorobenzoic acid]. VII. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: December 19, 2011. Lois Rossi, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows: PART 180—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 2. Section 180.576 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: ■ § 180.576 Cyhalofop-butyl; tolerances for residues. (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of cyhalofopbutyl, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities listed in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by measuring cyhalofop butyl [R-(+)-n-butyl-2-(4(4cyano-2-fluorophenoxy)- PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Parts per million Commodity Rice, grain ................................ Wild rice, grain .......................... * * * * 0.40 0.40 * [FR Doc. 2011–33480 Filed 12–29–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0959; FRL–9328–6] Difenoconazole; Pesticide Tolerances Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of difenoconazole in or on oat and rye commodities, and wheat, hay. Syngenta Crop Protection, Incorporated requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). DATES: This regulation is effective December 30, 2011. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before February 28, 2012, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– OPP–2010–0959. All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM 30DER1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 251 (Friday, December 30, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 82152-82157]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-33480]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0283; FRL-9330-1]


Cyhalofop-butyl; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This regulation amends tolerances for residues of cyhalofop-
butyl in or on rice, grain and rice, wild, grain. Dow AgroSciences, LLC 
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective December 30, 2011. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 28, 2012, 
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket 
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0283. All documents in the

[[Page 82153]]

docket are listed in the docket index available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is 
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain 
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the 
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. 
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic 
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard 
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac 
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket 
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn V. Montague, Registration 
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number: (703) 305-1243; email address: 
montague.kathryn@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an 
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. 
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those 
engaged in the following activities:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to 
provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by 
this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also 
be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System 
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in 
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you 
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a 
particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's 
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government 
Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a 
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a 
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided 
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify 
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0283 in the subject line on the first 
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must 
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before 
February 28, 2012. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections 
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the 
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of 
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public 
docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 
may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit a copy of 
your non-CBI objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID 
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0283, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public 
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 
NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South 
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only 
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30 
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). 
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed 
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of April 20, 2011 (76 FR 22067) (FRL-8869-
7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 
1F7836) by Dow AgroSciences, LLC, 9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, 
IN 46268. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.576 be amended by 
reestablishing and making permanent tolerances for residues of the 
herbicide, cyhalofop-butyl, R-(+)-n-butyl-2-(4(4-cyano-2-
fluorophenoxy)-phenoxy)propionate, plus cyhalofop acid, R-(+)-2-(4(4-
cyano-2-fluorophenoxy)-phenoxy)propionic acid) and the di-acid 
metabolite, (2R)-4-[4-(1-carboxyethoxy)phenoxy]-3-fluorobenzoic acid, 
in or on rice, grain and rice, wild, grain at 0.35 parts per million 
(ppm), respectively. That notice referenced a summary of the petition 
prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC, the registrant, which is available 
in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments 
received in response to the notice of filing. These amended tolerances 
are required due to recent side-by-side field trial data submitted to 
support a new formulation of cyhalofop-butyl, which resulted in higher 
than anticipated residues associated with the currently registered 
formulation with this active ingredient. Based upon review of the data 
supporting the petition, EPA has increased the proposed tolerances from 
0.35 ppm to 0.40 ppm and has revised the tolerance expression. The 
reasons for these changes are explained in Unit IV.D.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a 
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a 
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a 
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure 
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary 
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable 
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in 
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. 
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special 
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide 
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there 
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will

[[Page 82154]]

result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide 
chemical residue. * * *''
    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors 
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the 
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of 
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to 
make a determination on aggregate exposure for cyhalofop-butyl 
including exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this 
action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with 
cyhalofop-butyl follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its 
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of 
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered 
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities 
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and 
children.
    Cyhalofop-butyl has low or minimal acute toxicity via the oral, 
dermal and inhalation routes of exposure. It is minimally irritating to 
the eye, nonirritating to the skin and is not a dermal sensitizer.
    Kidney effects were observed after subchronic and chronic dosing of 
the rat and mouse as well as in the rabbit developmental and rat 
reproduction studies. In the 90-day rat study, lipofuscin pigment 
deposition in proximal tubule kidney cells was noted in both sexes in 
addition to hepatocyte eosinophilic granules (males only); and in the 
90-day mouse study (females only), there was an increase in absolute 
and relative kidney weights as well as swelling of the proximal tubule 
cells. In the rabbit developmental study, 1/18 dams in the mid-dose 
group and 9/18 dams in the high-dose group died or were sacrificed in 
extremis after exhibiting hematuria (gross pathological examinations 
revealed cloudy or dark colored kidneys). Slight kidney tubular cell 
swelling was observed only in adult males in the rat reproductive 
toxicity study. In the 18-month mouse carcinogenicity study, kidney 
findings included tubular dilatation, chronic glomurulonephritis and 
hyaline casts in females (not males). In both sexes in the chronic/
carcinogenicity rat study increased deposition of kidney changes (early 
and increased deposition of the pigments lipofuscin and hemosiderin in 
the renal proximal tubular cells) was observed. In addition, in females 
only, renal mineralization was observed.
    Non-kidney effects observed following subchronic or chronic 
exposure to cyhalofop-butyl included hyperplasia of the stomach mucosal 
epithelium (male mice only) in the 18-month mouse carcinogenicity study 
and brown and/or atrophied thymuses and decreased thymus weight in the 
90-day dog study. The thymus effects, which could be an indication of 
potential immunotoxicity, were not observed in the 1-year dog study or 
in other species (rats, mice or rabbits) and were not seen in any 
tested species following chronic exposure to cyhalofop-butyl.
    There was no evidence of developmental, reproductive or endocrine 
toxicity in the toxicology studies for cyhalofop-butyl. In the rat 
developmental toxicity study, there were no maternal or fetal effects 
observed up to the limit dose. In the rabbit developmental toxicity 
study, no fetal effects were observed up to the limit dose; whereas 
kidney effects (deaths related to hematuria and the occurrence of 
cloudy or dark colored kidneys on gross pathological examination) were 
seen in maternal animals. Slight kidney tubular cell swelling was 
observed in adult males in the rat reproductive toxicity study with no 
evidence of treatment-related effects observed in females or offspring. 
There were no systemic or neurotoxic effects noted at the limit dose in 
the gavage acute neurotoxicity study or in the 90-day feeding 
neurotoxicity study.
    In a previous 2002 risk assessment for cyhalofop-butyl, it was not 
possible to assess the carcinogenic potential of cyhalofop-butyl due to 
insufficient dosing in the rat and mouse carcinogenicity studies. In 
the absence of acceptable data, EPA assumed that cyhalofop-butyl had 
the same carcinogenic potential as the structural analog, diclofop-
methyl, and conducted an exposure assessment to evaluate cancer risk 
using quantitative linear low-dose extrapolation and the Q1* for 
diclofop-methyl of 2.3 x 10-1 (mg/kg/day)-1. 
Subsequently, two specific mechanistic studies (Peroxisome Proliferator 
Receptor-Alpha Reporter Assays) in the mouse were submitted to EPA. 
Review of the mechanistic data indicated that cyhalofop-butyl is not a 
liver toxicant/carcinogen for humans, since the rodent liver mode of 
action is not likely to occur in humans; and that the doses in the 
original long-term studies were approaching a maximum tolerated dose. 
In addition, there were no positive effects in the battery of mutagenic 
studies. Based on these findings, EPA has classified cyhalofop-butyl as 
``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.''
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the 
adverse effects caused by cyhalofop-butyl as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document ``Cyhalofop-butyl. Human Health Risk 
Assessment for Proposed Amended Tolerances on Rice and Wild Rice,'' p. 
8 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0283 and are also discussed in 
the final rule published in the Federal Register of April 8, 2009 (74 
FR 15876) (FRL-8406-8).

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA 
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of 
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the 
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no 
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for 
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed 
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to 
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) 
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified 
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with 
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a 
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe 
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes 
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the 
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of 
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the 
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete 
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm. A summary of the toxicological 
endpoints for cyhalofop-butyl used for human risk assessment is shown 
in the Table of this unit.

[[Page 82155]]



 Table--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Cyhalofop-butyl for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Point of departure and
         Exposure/scenario             uncertainty/safety    RfD, PAD, LOC for risk    Study and toxicological
                                             factors               assessment                  effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (All Populations)....   No appropriate endpoint attributable to a single dose was available in the
                                         current database. Therefore, an acute RfD was not established for the
                                                  general U.S. population or any population subgroup.
                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations)..  NOAEL= 1.0 mg/kg/day    Chronic RfD = 0.010 mg/ Carcinogenicity study in
                                      UFA = 10x.              kg/day.                 mice. LOAEL = 10.06/10.28
                                     UFH = 10x.............  cPAD = 0.010 mg/kg/day   mg/kg/day, M/F, based on
                                     FQPA SF = 1x..........                           kidney effects in females
                                                                                      including tubular
                                                                                      dilatation, chronic
                                                                                      glomerulonephritis, and
                                                                                      hyaline casts.
                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)..    Classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans'' in accordance
                                        with the EPA Final Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (March 29,
                                                                        2005).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members
  of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term
  study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA
  SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD =
  reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary 
exposure to cyhalofop-butyl, EPA considered exposure under the 
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing cyhalofop-butyl 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.576. EPA assessed dietary exposures from 
cyhalofop-butyl in food as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk 
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological 
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring 
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were 
identified in the toxicological studies for cyhalofop-butyl; therefore, 
a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure 
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996 
and 1998 Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). As 
to residue levels in food, EPA assumed that all rice and wild rice 
commodities would be treated with cyhalofop-butyl and contain 
tolerance-level residues.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has 
concluded that cyhalofop-butyl does not pose a cancer risk to humans. 
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing 
cancer risk is unnecessary.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening 
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk 
assessment for cyhalofop-butyl in drinking water. These simulation 
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of cyhalofop-butyl. Further information 
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure 
assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the Tier 1 Rice Model and Screening Concentration in 
Ground Water (SCI-GROW) model, the estimated drinking water 
concentrations (EDWCs) of cyhalofop-butyl for chronic exposures for 
non-cancer assessments (the only dietary exposure scenario for which a 
toxicological endpoint of concern was identified) are estimated to be 
21 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.152 ppb for ground 
water. Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly 
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk 
assessment, the water concentration value of 21 ppb was used to assess 
the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is 
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary 
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, 
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Cyhalofop-butyl is 
not registered for any specific use patterns that would result in 
residential exposure.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of 
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when 
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the 
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative 
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances 
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found cyhalofop-butyl to share a common mechanism of 
toxicity with any other substances, and cyhalofop-butyl does not appear 
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the 
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that 
cyhalofop-butyl does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other 
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which 
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the 
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA 
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants 
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal 
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity 
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a 
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This 
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety 
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default 
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when 
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different 
factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal 
toxicology data base for cyhalofop-butyl includes rat and rabbit 
developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity 
study in rats. There were no treatment-related effects observed in 
fetuses or offspring in any of these studies.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the 
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the 
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following 
findings:

[[Page 82156]]

    i. The toxicity database for cyhalofop-butyl is complete except for 
immunotoxicity data. EPA has evaluated the available cyhalofop-butyl 
toxicity data to determine whether an additional database uncertainty 
factor is needed to account for potential immunotoxicity. Brown and/or 
atrophied thymuses and decreased thymus weight were observed in the 90-
day dog study. However, these effects, which could be an indication of 
potential immunotoxicity, were not observed in the 1-year dog study or 
in other species (rats, mice or rabbits) and were not seen in any 
tested species following chronic exposure to cyhalofop-butyl. Based on 
these considerations, EPA has concluded that the doses and endpoints 
selected for risk assessment (along with traditional uncertainty 
factors) are protective of potential immunotoxicity and an additional 
uncertainty factor is not needed. The required immunotoxicity study has 
been received by EPA and is currently being reviewed. A screening- 
level review of this study indicates that there are no immunotoxic 
effects associated with cyhalofop-butyl.
    ii. There is no indication that cyhalofop-butyl is a neurotoxic 
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study 
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that cyhalofop-butyl results in increased 
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal 
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction 
study.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure 
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based 
on 100 percent crop treated and tolerance-level residues. EPA made 
conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water 
modeling used to assess exposure to cyhalofop-butyl in drinking water. 
Residential exposure of infants and children is not expected. These 
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by 
cyhalofop-butyl.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide 
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the 
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA 
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the 
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term 
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, 
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an 
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into 
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and 
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure 
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, 
cyhalofop-butyl is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this 
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to 
cyhalofop-butyl from food and water will utilize 18% of the cPAD for 
All Infants (< 1 year old), the population group receiving the greatest 
exposure. There are no residential uses for cyhalofop-butyl.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into 
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food 
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Cyhalofop-
butyl is not registered for any use patterns that would result in 
residential exposure. Therefore, the short-term aggregate risk is the 
sum of the risk from exposure to cyhalofop-butyl through food and water 
and will not be greater than the chronic aggregate risk.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure 
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic 
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure 
level). Cyhalofop-butyl is not registered for any use patterns that 
would result in intermediate-term residential exposure. Therefore, the 
intermediate-term aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from exposure 
to cyhalofop-butyl through food and water, which has already been 
addressed, and will not be greater than the chronic aggregate risk.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the evidence 
summarized in Unit III.A., cyhalofop-butyl is classified as ``not 
likely to be carcinogenic to humans'' and is, therefore, not expected 
to pose a cancer risk.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA 
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result 
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate 
exposure to cyhalofop-butyl residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (Gas Chromatography/Mass 
Spectrometry (GC/MS) Method GRM 99.06) is available to enforce the 
tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, 
Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes 
Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email 
address: residuemethods@epa.gov.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. 
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent 
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA 
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established 
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA 
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and 
Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards 
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety 
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United 
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from 
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain 
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established a MRL for cyhalofop-butyl.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    EPA has revised the proposed tolerances levels. The petitioner 
requested tolerances of 0.35 ppm based on the use of the North American 
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) tolerance calculation procedures. Based on 
the submitted rice data using the Organization for Economic Cooperation 
and Development (OECD) tolerance calculation procedures that were 
implemented in April 2011, EPA calculated that the rice, grain and wild 
rice, grain tolerances should be 0.40 ppm.
    Also, EPA is revising the tolerance expression in order to make 
clear that the tolerances cover residues of the herbicide cyhalofop-
butyl, including its metabolites and degradates. Compliance with the 
tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring cyhalofop butyl, 
cyhalofop acid, and the di-acid metabolite.

[[Page 82157]]

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of cyhalofop-
butyl, including its metabolites and degradates, as set forth in the 
regulatory text.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of 
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from 
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and 
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been 
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is 
not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks 
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any 
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any 
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal 
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis 
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in 
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the 
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food 
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this 
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and 
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions 
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that 
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or 
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government 
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has 
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled 
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition, 
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any 
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would 
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant 
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to 
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report 
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, 
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the 
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal 
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 19, 2011.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.


0
2. Section 180.576 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  180.576  Cyhalofop-butyl; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of cyhalofop-
butyl, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the 
commodities listed in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance 
levels specified below is to be determined by measuring cyhalofop butyl 
[R-(+)-n-butyl-2-(4(4-cyano-2-fluorophenoxy)-phenoxy)propionate], 
cyhalofop acid [R-(+)-2-(4(4-cyano-2-fluorophenoxy)-phenoxy)propionic 
acid], and the di-acid metabolite [(2R)-4-(4-(1-carboxyethoxy)phenoxy)-
3-fluorobenzoic acid].

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rice, grain................................................         0.40
Wild rice, grain...........................................         0.40
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-33480 Filed 12-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P